TK Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by da#1skinsfan So hes a pro bowl alternate every year? If hes a top 5 player, he should be a Pro Bowl starter/reserve every year. Forget alternates. If hes an alternate that just shows that hes not worth the cash hes demanding. So, by your logic, we should get rid of Portis? I mean, he was a Pro Bowl alternate this year. He must not be worth the cash he's getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgraw238 Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 Unlike Samuels, Portis is not eating up 10 million in cap space for the current year. I want to reiterate that I am in favor of restructuring Samuels. I started this thread because all the events of the last several days are predicated on Samuels restructuring, a move which he has refused to do for some time now. Plus, he now thinks he should be paid in the Walter Jones range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by mcgraw238 Unlike Samuels, Portis is not eating up 10 million in cap space for the current year. Point #1. Point #2 - Portis put up Pro Bowl starter/reserve #'s BOTH of his years before signing here. So at the time, yes Portis was worth a top 5 contract, ESPECIALLY considering his age. Granted, Samuels has made the PB twice as well, but again, this is now his 2nd year not making it, and he is eating the cap like crazy, and seems unwilling to restructure to help the team, only to help himself first. If theres a yr where Portis doesnt make the probowl 2yrs running, and eats up $10M of the cap, Id talk to his ass about a restructure too. Dont think Danny wouldnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightenupSandyBaby Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 I was at the Redskins store in Lake Forest Mall...and guess who's jersey I saw on the $29.99 SALE RACK!!! Chris overrated Samuels!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 I want to keep Samuels, but I don't want to give him Jones money. I just don't think it's worth it. We can spread the money around to C and G and add more depth, as opposed to paying Samuels $15 Mil and still having an overall crap line. At this point I'd just be willing to cut Samuels, have Coles return the $5 Mil and cut him, and that way we will have enough cap room for the future(so no I'm not advocating using the cap room for this year either). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 guys no matter what you think..... you are not going to get pro-owl caliber payers at minimum salary. and if the FO hadn't been greedy trying to save a few buck, Samuels would have already signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCRoughrider Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 If he won't renegotiate then cut him. There is no other option. His level of play doesn't warrant the amount of cap space he's eating up. And don't take any kind of hit on Coles. Keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by PCRoughrider If he won't renegotiate then cut him. There is no other option. His level of play doesn't warrant the amount of cap space he's eating up. And don't take any kind of hit on Coles. Keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie0720 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Can I start a thread about why we should cut Jansen, Samuels, Thomas, and Dockery! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by mookie0720 Can I start a thread about why we should cut Jansen, Samuels, Thomas, and Dockery! Throw in LaVar and Ramsey while you're at it. We don't need any of those salaries working against our cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsForLife260 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by REEGSKINS i agree. we dont need to overpay for him , we will do fine developing molinaro or wilson. i rather use that money on pierce and smoot. I agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCRoughrider Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Originally posted by bubba9497 Some people are willing to take so much crap from players. DON'T OVERPAY FOR PLAYERS! That's an easy concept that we should always follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgraw238 Posted February 27, 2005 Author Share Posted February 27, 2005 At this point I'd just be willing to cut Samuels, have Coles return the $5 Mil and cut him, and that way we will have enough cap room for the future(so no I'm not advocating using the cap room for this year either). Amen. The sucessful teams in the NFL (Patriots, Eagles, Steelers, etc) do not overpay for talent. These teams hold the line and refuse to pay top 5 $$$, for top 10 talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 Originally posted by PCRoughrider Some people are willing to take so much crap from players. DON'T OVERPAY FOR PLAYERS! That's an easy concept that we should always follow. and some people don't have a CLUE about the cap or player evaluation. and there are some who do understand, like thinker Originally posted by thinker Let's at least get some facts right. Samuels currently counts $9.643 million against the cap for this year, including $6 million in salary. He will count $11.32 mil next year. But next year is voidable. The contract was written such that the last year would likely be voided. When he voids the last year (2006) his cap number for this year goes to over $12 million. These numbers are such because Samuels has twice previously "done the right thing" and renegotiated his deals. We asked him to and he did. The two renegotiations are what have given us these huge cap numbers - not Samuels' selfishness and greediness. It makes no sense for Samuels to give back the $6 million owed this year take a $12 million sb and minimum salary for the next two years. He could just play this year for the $6 million and be a ufa next year and get another $14 - 16 million bonus in 2006. As it is getting a $14 -16 million bonus this year will still cost him $6 million in cash. So while we all want him to sign for the least possible - he is giving back some significant money. If we don't want to give him that bonus then cut him - he'll get it from someone else - we'll have no LT and a huge cap hit. And we need him to redo his deal because WE wanted him to rework his deal three times now. We put ourselves in this position so you can't blame him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgraw238 Posted February 27, 2005 Author Share Posted February 27, 2005 14-16M SB? If that's where we are with Samuels, that's all the more reason to part ways. That sounds an awful lot like a guy wanting Walter Jones money. So were back to paying top 10 talent, top 5 money. Synder and Co. have been doing that for several years, last I checked it hasn't worked well. I agree that we have put ourselves in this position, I just think it's time we stopped making the same mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskns21 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 Would you trade or release him? Would you trade him to Cleveland for Winslow and a pick? If not, where would you ship him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martino Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I would trade him for Winslow but I dont think the Browns would go for that. Shoot we can even throw in Rod Gardner and they still wouldnt go for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyholetsgogrant Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 "If Samuels Doesn't Restructure or Lower His Demands... " OR ELSE!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 there about 10 threads already on this subject here's one on the front page http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=92761 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyholetsgogrant Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I say trade him if he dosent restructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STaylorLayintheWOOD Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 i think trading him is only an option if we can get a solid OT in return because without him our line will be very very shaky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I positive it won't come to that. If it does, how could we fix a contract for another team in order to make a trade if we can't get him to fix his contract for us? A trade would be out of the question, so if push comes to shove, cut him. It won't come that, he'll be restructured before FA starts. Bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 This is an absolutely crazy thread. Anyone in their right mind that thinks we could cut Samuels and replace him with some other guy not not named Orlando Pace is utterly idiotic. While Samuels is not as good as Walter Jones or Pace, he's not that far behind them in the next tier of LTs. Let's put some perspective on this all: Two years ago, Flozell Adams got a $10M signing bonus, which is something equivalent to $12M this year. Jones got a $16M bonus just recently. Samuels is clearly better that Adams but, as noted before, behind Jones. Ergo, if Samuels gets some thing like $14M, I've got no objections to that. Hell, if he got a $16M bonus, I wouldn't be too perturbed since he's got to something for the current year salary he's foregoing. Let's get real here, folks. Cutting him? Good Lord. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCRoughrider Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 Originally posted by bubba9497 and some people don't have a CLUE about the cap or player evaluation. and there are some who do understand, like thinker I perfectly understand the cap and my "player evaluations" are fine. By restructuring his contract, it will also be extended. Did Samuels intend for his first contract to be his last contract? If not then he's going to have to sign another one at some point. Why not now? I'm not saying he should lose any money. Just structure the new contract to be more cap friendly. And his performance, recently, has not be that good. Despite that, I'm not going to take any money away from him. And the team should still follow the advice to not overpay players. And cut Samuels if he doesn't restructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 What do you mean by "recently"? If it's last year, you're clearly wrong. He did very well for us last year. In the prior two years, he got screwed by Kim Helton, one of the main reasons why he didn't restructure back then. And if he doesn't restructure, who do we replace him with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.